An alternative to the clinical negligence system

doi:10.1136/bmj.39050.696192.94

BMJ 2007;334:400-402 (24 February), doi:10.1136/bmj.39050.696192.94

Analysis

An alternative to the clinical negligence system

Richard Furniss, barrister, Sarah Ormond-Walshe, barrister

22 Old Buildings, Lincoln's Inn, London WC2A 3UP

Correspondence to: Sarahow@22ob.com

Richard Furniss and Sarah Ormond-Walshe analyse the NHS RedressAct and compare it with the current system

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

The current system for patients to obtain compensation aftermedical error has been much criticised. It is seen as complex,slow, and costly, both in terms of legal fees and time of clinicalstaff. Patients are said to be dissatisfied with the lack ofexplanation and apologies, and the system is believed to encouragedefensiveness and secrecy in the health service.¹ After publishinga consultation document in 2003 that recommended reforming theway in which allegations of clinical negligence in the NHS arehandled,¹ the government passed the NHS Redress Act 2006 lastNovember. We examine its likely effects.

Claims under the new act

The act introduces a scheme for redress without recourse tothe civil law. The scheme will apply to England and Wales andcovers only hospital care. It makes provision for investigation,assessment of liability, and remedy for the complainant. Thisremedy might include an apology, explanation, or award of financialcompensation . . . [Full text of this article]